Young

Just put the camera in maximum cinematic mode.

The face detection test by Ricci Nikon shows some concerning rolling shutter when he's moving his head rapidly (it's on a 105mm lens so maybe nothing too much to worry about). Very excited apart from that.

According to rumors, yes. I've noticed that you sound awfully sure about a lot of things only circulating on rumor sites or Weibo.

I guess the Fuji looked better and that your Sony had all kinds of wonky color issues which would take hours for you to fix in post, introducing nasty artifacts. And then they still wouldn't look right

I own the A7rIII which produces a vile image color wise compared to the x-t3 eterna and I sold my GH5 because I hated the skin tones. So I don't know what you're seeing. And you can't turn the noise reduction ”completely off” on neither the x-t3 or the GH5. On the Fuji, you can set it to -4. It'd be interesting to hear from fellow owners and real world users what they think. Maybe @Andrew Reid can chime in? I just bought the GH5s brand new on a sick deal hear in Sweden though. 1000€ including sd card and extra battery. I believe in the color science of the GH5s. The GH5, not so much.

I own the camera and haven't seen any ”waxiness” yet, and trust me, I was concerned about this with the X-T2. Maybe you don't know how to operate the camera properly?

Would love to see various skintones in various lighting with high ISOs and Eterna Some rolling shutter tests in 4k 25p wouldn't hurt either.

It has mojo in spades, just like the D750.

He's not referring to the Dixie Dixon video, but the one from Italy.

What are you talking about? I never said that – I URGED you to take a look at the footage from Mattias Burling. But you're obviously too delusional to do this. I don't give a fuck about the actual numbers of the dynamic range since different manufacturers measure it in different fashion. I care about the image and the d750, with regards to dynamic range, is obviously not falling short in comparison to BMCC, for example.

Also from dpreview: ”The internal capture is 8-bit at up to 100Mbps.” It's a shame, but seeing the kind of magic they worked with the d750:s low bitrate it's probably usable.

Lovely colors and skin tones, they just look right, even when the white balance is off, which is where the Sonys always struggle, even the latest ones.

Did you even watch @Mattias Burlings video? Are you daft?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNHQUGgZAKE&t=1023s Imaging resource states it's 100mbps. And I've seen others as well. I really hope that you and DPreview are right, and that the 29.59 recording limit applies to 4k footage. If that's the case I think I'll might accept the battery life.

Yes but that could be in 1080p, lex Fuji X-t2.

You should perhaps quote a reliable source because it sure as shit isn't in the official spec sheet. https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/mirrorless-cameras/z-6.html#tab-ProductDetail-ProductTabs-TechSpecs

Everybody seems very certain that the Z6 will have a good codec bitrate and so on an so forth. But reading the official Nikon spec sheet they clearly stipulate 10-15 minutes of video (battery) and the very uncertain: Up to 29:59 min recording time. I fear that this only holds true for the 1080p recording. And the only bit rate number I've seen or heard is 100mbps internally, worse than the d850.

Buy the A7rIII if you have the budget. Personally I think it's a both a better video camera, without the aggressive noise reduction of the A7iii; and a far better stills camera. And it doesn't overheat, feels more solid.

Haha, very true. I just bought it, so excited to test it out.

Forgive me for interrupting but I have used both cameras: The a7riii has less rolling shutter, better motion cadence (imho), a better noise reduction algorithm which reduces ghosting outside of the log-gammas and it's easier to pull manual focus due to the better EVF and screen. If you like sharpness in full frame, then the a7iii is better of course, but sharpness is, as we know, a bourgeois concept.

I see no difference other than that the face recognition feels more solid in the rIII, as long as the face don't stray to far to the edges of the frame.

There is something to be said about the A7III that goes beyond specs – I own the A7III and I own the A7rIII and I used to own the GH5 and after som extensive testing I must say the A7III is lacking. It's a fine camera, certainly at the price point. Small but by no means insignificant things make it less useful to me however. For starters the 4K full frame may be very detailed and sharp, but is plagued by a weird shimmer and a subtle stuttering when moving the camera and it seems to me it has more moiré than the A7RIII, barcode artifacts notwithstanding. I also find that the pixel binned 4K full frame readout from the A7rIII is more pleasant to the eyes and I think it has to do with better motion cadence, less rolling shutter and more efficient IBIS (that 0.5 step makes a big difference in real world usage without stabilized lenses). Not saying the A7III is not a good video camera, but I do prefer the image produced by the rIII. It would be interesting to hear if someone agrees/disagrees. I know the camera isn't available yet in the US, but here in Sweden and the rest of Europe it's been in stores for some time now.

Unfortunately eye AF only works for stills, but face-detection has been impeccable so far for me in video mode, both with the A7rIII and the AIII.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?303559-Measuring-rolling-shutter-put-a-number-on-this-issue!

It seems very similar to my A7rIII i s35 4k, which is very similar to the GH5, around 16-17ms.